a truly great partner them them, been a great partner in his marriage, has never once let us down with his personal behavior, and yet that. >> hate him. they really do. and i don't have to be the one to tell you we live in a country where a good chunk of the country hates its elected president, and won't really, i mean really tell you why. it's the same reason they spend there time thinking of clever gimmicks to keep so many people from voting. anybody disagree? that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "politicsnation" with al sharpton starts right now. thanks, chris, and thanks to you for tuning in. tonight's lead, breaking news. the last juror speaks out, juror b29, the only juror we have not heard from in the george zimmerman case is now speaking out. and it's an explosive new interview that takes us inside those 16 hours of deliberations, talking about the trial and the

verdict that gripped the nation. in an interview with abc news, juror b29 says, quote, george zimmerman got away with murder, but you can't get away from god. and at the end of the day, he is going to have a lot of questions and answers he has to deal with. but the law couldn't prove it. george zimmerman got away with murder, but you can't get away from god. a stunning statement that raises questions for millions of americans who watched a trial. juror b29 also says, quote, i was the juror that was going to give them the hung jury. i fought to the end." she fought to the end. she started with second-degree murder. then ended up with not guilty. a lot of people tonight will be wondering about that process. how it happened. since the verdict, she's the first juror to show her face and

identify herself. her first name is maddie. she is a 36-year-old puerto rican woman. the only minority on the jury. she is a puerto rican, according to abc. and tonight she dropped a bombshell about the trial and the verdict that sparked such a national debate. joining me now is former prosecutor seema iyer and joy reid, managing editor of thegrio.com, and criminal defense attorney ken padowitz. thank you all for joining me. >> great to be here. >> thank you. >> joy, what is your reaction to hearing that this juror says, quote, george zimmerman got away with murder? >> you know, i think, first of all, it's finally a relief to find out that really there were no blacks on the jury. there was a matter of contention. we know now this was the juror who initially wanted to charge second-degree murder. so in her mind, this was a murder, it wasn't a killing.

but you have all of these dynamics. and seema can probably talk more about this than i can. you have only six people, six women, the group think and the pressure that had to be on this juror to go all the way from second-degree murder, and as she said, to fight to the end for that idea, to have two other jurors who wanted manslaughter and three jurors who wanted to acquit when they took that first vote according to b37, the other juror. so the idea that you took three people who thought that this was a murder or at least a crime and have them converted over by the pressure that had to have been put on them by the other three jurors, it tells you a lot about a, the dynamics of jurors, but b, why six jurors is the wrong number of people. it's a lot harder to withstand and hold your position because you don't have anyone else on your fight. >> but she didn't fight. that's the problem. she did not fight, joy. and during jury selection, we call that voir dire. you are supposed to, both sides, both attorneys should question people and say what it is going to be like for you sitting in that room, joy, and what if

reverend al and all of his friends gang up on you, joy, and it's friday night. >> they should have done that. >> they should have. they put in so much time talking about the media and the outside influences. they have forgotten the fundamentals of jurisprudence here. >> but i want to ask something else that she said was interesting. and ken, i want you on this and seema back to you, joy. she said that as the law was read to me, you have no proof. let me play to you. let me show you the quote. if you have no proof that he killed them intentionally, you can't say he is guilty. you can't put a man in jail, even though in our hearts we felt he was guilty. ken, does this go back to what a lot of us are raising about the law? is some of this about not being able to fight back because the way the law is written, she didn't feel she could fight what

the law says? >> well, i think she was confused about the law. and all these quotes show to me one of three things. either a failure of the evidence, a failure of the prosecution attorneys, or both. and i think the prosecutors, we have to look really hard about what the prosecutors did here, because their job was to make sure that the jury understood the law and applied the law to the facts in this case. and this jury apparently is confused. this doesn't have to be an intentional killing in order to be convicted of manslaughter. >> right. >> somebody who is driving a car and is convicted of dui manslaughter didn't have to intend to kill that person. they could have been convicted and charged with manslaughter without an intentional act. >> however -- >> there is a problem here, there is a failure. and i don't blame this juror. i think it's a failure on the part of the prosecutor. >> however, the act of pulling the trigger has been conceded. nobody is even contemplating whether george zimmerman committed that intentional act of pulling the trigger. so why she chose to use the word

intentional. let's look at the quotes that you have put up, reverend al, and none of them are talking about self-defense. so she believes self-defense, she would have told us that. she is using the law as a scapegoat right now for not owning up to not finding the verdict that she was intending to find. >> or did she not understand the law? >> well, this is the thing. you have people who are lay people, right, who don't understand the law, who the instructions given to them by the judge, and i have to also fault the prosecution. the smartest thing mark o'mara ever did is bring up that chart. >> the thermostat? >> the thermostat that was highly influential obviously among these jurors. and i do have to question also whether b37, because this is why you don't want lawyers' wives on. she probably had undue influence too. my husband is a lawyer there are all these things that could have gone on in that jury room. the bottom line is whether the judge instructed them properly

on the law. whether the prosecution properly explained the law. clearly this juror feels she rendered a verdict that went about her gut instinct and her belief about what it should have been. >> but because if you you go back to juror b37 that joy just mentioned, she also mentioned stand your ground. >> right. >> and they talked about that in the jury room. so obviously, there was some discussion about that could have been confusing and could have led her to believe, as seema said, that we're just just talking about self-defense here because this is not in any way mentioned in this transcript of this interview, ken. >> reverend, you're absolutely right. the law is confusing. when you listen to these jury instructions in any murder case, it is very confusing. lawyers disagree about exactly what things mean. it requires the prosecution to properly explain the law and apply it. not just explain it, but apply to it the facts that they presented in the trial.

spoon-feeding piece by piece by piece. if you don't do that, and you send a juror back into the jury room, she may feel that he is guilty of murder. she said that she believes in her heart he was guilty of murder, but she doesn't understand the law and how it applied to the facts in this case to properly hold out and convince the rest of the jurors why they should come back with a verdict of guilty. and that is a failure. and i don't blame this juror. i feel very sympathetic for her that she is so, you know, taken aback now and having to sleep and think about this and deal with this on a daily basis. it's a failure on the part of the lawyer in not explaining how the law worked here. >> let me put up another quote from her, and you can respond. she says she still has doubts about the verdict. i felt i let a lot of people down. and i'm thinking to myself, did i go the right way? did i go the wrong way? >> she knows she went the wrong way because she started off at murder in the second degree. and what people also don't realize, the general public,

there is no polygraph on why you came to a certain verdict, okay. she could have stuck to her guns with murder in the second degree for whatever reason. and that's also a concept of jury nullification that we may not have time to discuss now. but no one asked her to push herself to the other side. she let herself go there. she said in this transcript that you have given us, it says that he got away with murder. >> right. >> but -- but -- but we don't know no one, we don't know what happened in that jury room, and we don't know the interpretation of the law in that jury room. i raise again we were told by the other juror they were talking about stand your ground. >> right. >> a lawyer's wife on the jury. >> right. >> i'm sorry. >> but remember what was happening that night? we were both here, rev. they went late into the night. and we were sitting on that panel. and we were saying why don't they take a break? they asked for manslaughter.

so obviously at some point they were debating manslaughter. and they kept going. i question whether or not we should have a limit where if they had had the night to sleep it over, and rather than -- >> i agree with that. >> when you look at the way group dynamics work, there are ways to push people to what you want. if it's five against one with, one minority, all the dynamics that play in too. that's why you need diverse juries. when it's just one against five. >> but seems strange, seema, they sent out the note about manslaughter. >> and that was it. >> and then they came back with a verdict. and the judge said something about what was specific about manslaughter. so that's what i'm saying. >> they didn't know what to ask. >> no. with all due respect, joy, when a juror asks for the manslaughter instruction, give them the manslaughter instruction. >> right. >> i don't understand what the debate was about. and i was watching that. i was here. i don't understand why the judge sent them back for a more specific note there is nothing more specific. read them the charge. >> i'd like you all to stay with

me there is a lot more to talk about here. coming up, more from juror b29. we will hear from her in her words, her own words what happened behind closed doors. and major news today from attorney general eric holder. he is taking a big stand in the fight for voting rights. plus, all week long, bill o'reilly's reaching about race and the african-american community. >> talking voice believes the collapse of the african-american traditional family is the primary reason, the gap between blacks and whites is so large. >> i'll show you, yes, show you why he is a complete fraud on the issue. and friend or foe, i want to know. e-mail me. "reply al" is coming. ♪music plays

♪behold! ♪the power of a well booked vacation!♪ ♪booking.com ♪booking dot yeaaaahhhh! let's say you pay your guy around 2% to manage your money. that's not much you think. except it's 2% every year. does that make a difference? search "cost of financial advisors" ouch. over time it really adds up. then go to e-trade and find out how much our advice costs. spoiler alert: it's low. really? yes, really. e-trade offers investment advice and guidance from dedicated, professional financial consultants. it's guidance on your terms, not ours. that's how our system works. e-trade. less for us. more for you. what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'.

coming up, more from juror b29. the first time we're hearing from her. what do you think of her comments on george zimmerman's trial? please share your thoughts. just head over to facebook and search "politicsnation" and linebacker us to join the conversation that keeps going long after the show ends. 't supe on water. ♪ or turn nature into power. ♪ night wasn't supposed to look like noon. ♪ and we certainly weren't supposed to haul 30,000 pounds up by the bootstraps. ♪ but with best-in-class 850 pound-feet of torque,

ram can. ♪ this is the full line of new ram commercial vehicles. here's to the next frontier man isn't supposed to take on. guts. glory. ram. the zimmerman trial and the president's speech sparked a national debate on race in america, but all week many on the right, including bill

o'reilly, have been distorting the conversation by attacking the president and the civil rights community. listen to this from last night. >> so it's clear that people pushing racial injustice that they believed happened in the zimmerman trial that. >> don't really want to talk about complicated racial problems in general. what the grievance industry does want is to divide the country along racial lines, because that's good for business. and they may be succeeding. >> trying to divide the country? 50 years from the march on washington, and there are serious issues that need attention on voting rights, on equal justice justice, on civil rights. but mr. o'reilly has the problems in the african-american community figured out. >> talking voice believes that the collapse of the african-american traditional family is the primary reason the gap between blacks and whites is so large. as i said at the top of this memo, our leadership simply will not deal with that issue, and

that is why we have this problem. >> why is bill oh really talking about the african-american family? it's hard to take much of this race talk seriously. i took bill to sylvia's restaurant in harlem for dinner 2007. here is how he described it afterward. >> there wasn't one person in sylvia's who was screaming m-fer, i want more iced tea. you know, everybody was -- it was like going into an italian restaurant in an all-white suburb in the sense of people were sitting there and they were ordering and having fun and there wasn't any kind of craziness at all. >> imagine that, no crazy innocence a restaurant, no one screaming i want more iced tea, mfer. and listen to bill talk about a concert he went.

to. >> i went to the concert by anita baker at radio city music hall. and the crowd was 50/50, black/white. and the blacks were well-dressed, and she came out, anita baker came out on stage and said look, this is a show for the family. we're not going to have any profanity here. we're not going to do any rapping here. the band was excellent, but they were dressed in tuxedos. and, you know, this is what white america doesn't know, particularly people who don't have a lot of people with black americans. they think that the culture is dominated by twista, ludacris and snoop dogg. >> yes, this is the same guy attacking the president and the civil rights community on race this week. not much of a contribution to the debate, that's for sure. joining me now is david rock, founder of media matters for america, and joy reid is back with us. thank you both for joining me. >> thank you.

>> i mean, joy, how can you believe anyone, i mean how can anyone believe he is credible on the issue of race? >> yeah, i'm going to propose a psilojournalism. if you are shocked that people eat with knives and forks and don't throw food and shocked that they actually dress in clothes. they're not running around with spears. why doesn't he add that too. if that is your attitude toward black people, let's say you probably shouldn't talk about it. >> and i went to dinner with him, and this was his reaction to someone else on the radio about what he saw in a harm lem restaurant. >> the exoticization of african-american by people from the right, this notion that we're something from another planet, that you have to go visit us where you're looking in and oh my goodness, they're actually not throwing things at each other. the conversation that the right wants to have about race comes from the same place as the 47% comments, this notion that african-americans are all violent felons and dead beets. and they want to start the

so-called conversation on race there. do they not understand that hip-hop music is consumed mostly by white young men, that they are the majority of customers? >> and many of news the civil rights community who try to work with the hip-hoppers but denounce the language. and i still denounce it, even though we're trying to reach these kids. david, let me ask you. when you hear bill o'reilly and the right wing talking about the president as a divider for speaking out on race, listen to this. >> obama is all about creating chaos and upsetting the order of things. he is all about stirring the pot. and generally, involving things that have to do with race. >> is it selective moral outrage? >> it absolutely. it's done by politicians and leaders who want to get people ginned up against each other. >> the man who was supposed to unite the united states of

america is an expert on the most divisive form of politics in existence today. >> now, david, you've been covering this a long time in watching the right wing a long time. they're trying to paint the president as a divider for explaining racial profiling and explaining a lot of the reaction to the verdict of george zimmerman. how do you deal with the right now all of the sudden becoming the experts on race? >> well, i think it's not all of the sudden. let's remember the context here. at fox news, the fish rots from the head. so back in 1968, you had roger ailes, who is now the fox news chief, using the n-word prepping richard nixon for a public appearance. this is part of the southern strategy at the time to attract democrats into the republican party by stoking racial hate and prestigious. then in 1988, you had roger ailes' fingerprints all over the willie horton attack on michael

dukakis. we have on our website an 11 page document that shows fox news, its long history of race-baiting which included attacks on civil rights activist shirley sherrod, making up scandal about the new black panthers and purchasing a birtherism. they don't know, i guess, that this isn't 1968 or 1988 anymore. and as much as we're outraged by this, i think the people who should be outrage ready republicans who have to run for office and the folks over at the republican national committee who are trying to rebrand, to rebuild their relationships. >> or at least they're saying that. >> they're saying that. >> let me ask this point, david. >> sure. >> to joy, because i want you to weigh in on this as well. they've also now discovered black on black crime. all of the sudden, they are now talking about violence in chicago. this has been going on a long time. it's been covered on the show. hadiya pendleton, the

15-year-old young black that was killed by blacks, mother first appearance on this show, they discovered it this week. watch. this. >> 61 people died in chicago, and i have their names right here. >> the president joining the race debate, taking a firm stand in the trayvon martin case. so why is the president addressing this case and not the shootings in his hometown of chicago? >> the president should have given the speech he gave today on the streets of chicago where black-on-black crime is at an all time epidemic. >> a conversation about all the african-americans that were just killed in chicago. >> now, they never mentioned chicago before this, never. >> right. >> it wasn't a big story. >> that's right. >> now all of the sudden when you have a community and people in the white and latino and black community outraged about a law stand your ground and a jury, they tried to distort it by saying why aren't we talking about what we were always talking about, violence in the

community. >> correct. >> but there is no one in the community. you manage the grio. correct me if i'm wrong, that i know. >> right. >> that killed somebody and was there with the body and a gun in their hand and the police say tell me your story and they sent him home. they're arrested in our community if you know who did it. >> that's right. >> and they should be. but now they're trying to take what is one issue and totally make it a totally different issue. and that is an insult to the intelligence of their own views. >> no, absolutely. and at the grio, we cover these things every day that are happening in our community. i think they forget that hadiya pendleton's parents were sitting in the box with the the apartment complex and the first lady went to the memorial service for hadiya. >> and the president came in and made a speech. >> exactly. >> before fox news discovered it. >> and they didn't care about hadiya pendleton. they didn't care about the 500 murders in chicago. they only care about in the context of being able to

criticize democrats and blame them for the problems in the inner city. i hate to tell them, but the african-american community is not a johnny come lately to the problems in the inner city. they are. because honestly, all they care about is finding new ways to attack the african-american civil rights leadership and to attack the president. >> and we care about hadiya pendleton and trayvon martin. >> exactly. >> and we don't holler for iced tea in the restaurant. >> exactly. >> david, mr. o'reilly goes back into talking about the african-american family all week. listen to this. >> the reason there is so much violence and chaos in the black precincts is the disintegration of the african-american family. we've got to stop young black women from having babies out of wedlock. you've got to discourage that actively. what do you think of them investing all of this energy into the martin case, all right, the marches, the protests, everything, and absolutely nothing into the disintegration

of the african-american family and the violence in places like chicago. >> now, david, we are talking about the justice system. messy. is mr. o'reilly purposely trying to change the conversation to something else that has nothing to do with that case? because certainly we're not talking about the destruction of family had anything to do with why zimmerman shot trayvon martin. so is this a strategy here? >> yes. i think it's a strott. >> first of dodge and deny, and then divide. what he is trying to dodge obviously is the reality of white racism in this country. what he is denying and dodging are the real issues that face our country, the inequities in the education system, the disparity in sentencing for young black males and incarceration rates and persistent poverty. the president invited us to a meaningful dialogue. and unfortunately, with folks

like bill o'reilly, who is a bigot, who accuses the folks they disagree with being part of a racial industry, frankly, the only industry based on race that i know about is this toxic talk radio. >> now, joy, and i want to be clear, all of us are going to continue fighting against violence in the community. i mean we -- >> of course. >> have done that for years and will continue to do that and deal with violence. and deal with all of the misbehavior in terms of our family structures and i will continue to fight hip-hoppers. i'm working with them, trying to get them to understand me. they understand. me understand them. we're going to continue to do that. but you can't do that and excuse injustices in the community, because then you don't have a credibility to even address the issues in the community. >> yeah, just like we would eat at sylvia's with knives and forks and not throw things we can also talk, walk and chew gum at the same time on issues of violence in the community and issues of gun violence outside of it.

and others in addition to what david mentioned, this is also a very flashy attempt to use the shiny keys of racial stereotyping to distract from the issue of gun laws. >> right. >> because the reason they want to do anything, even throwing out the most vile knowings of:00 black people to distract folks is they don't want to talk about the gun laws that we talked about in the first segment, things like stand your ground being proliferated by the national rifle association are the real problem, and they don't want to talk about it. they know that reasonable people will look at laws like stand your ground and say you know what? they moo mai not be reasonable. we may need to fight the nra. what fox news and talk radio are handmade dense of big business, handmade dens of corporations and gun manufacturers. they do their bidding at all times and in many way possible. this is about stopping reasonable people from passing sane gun laws and attending things like stand your ground. >> and that's very important as we continue to deal with gun laws and the other issues. and let me stay this.

we don't want to single out one person, but we do want to set the record straight. and we're not going to allow them to decide the conversation that we're going to have in this country. we should be discussing it all and not be censored or limited to just one view that excuses anything that ought to be on the table and discussed. david brock and joy reid, thank you for your time tonight. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> coming up more on the breaking news tonight. the emotional words for trayvon martin's parents. juror b29 breaks her silence. we will hear directly from her. and big news today. attorney general eric holder's powerful fight with texas and the supreme court on voting rights. stay with us. this day calls you.

to fight chronic osteoarthritis pain. to fight chronic low back pain. to take action. to take the next step. today, you will know you did something for your pain. cymbalta can help. cymbalta is a pain reliever fda-approved to manage chronic musculoskeletal pain. one non-narcotic pill a day, every day, can help reduce this pain. tell your doctor right away if your mood worsens, you have unusual changes in mood or behavior or thoughts of suicide.

anti-depressants can increase these in children, teens, and young adults. cymbalta is not for children under 18. people taking maois, linezolid or thioridazine or with uncontrolled glaucoma should not take cymbalta. taking it with nsaid pain relievers, aspirin, or blood thinners may increase bleeding risk. severe liver problems, some fatal, were reported. signs include abdominal pain and yellowing skin or eyes. tell your doctor about all your medicines, including those for migraine and while on cymbalta, call right away if you have high fever, confusion and stiff muscles or serious allergic skin reactions like blisters, peeling rash, hives, or mouth sores to address possible life-threatening conditions. talk about your alcohol use, liver disease and before you reduce or stop cymbalta. dizziness or fainting may occur upon standing. take the next step. talk to your doctor. cymbalta can help.

diarrhea, gas, bloating? yes! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues... with three strains of good bacteria. [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'. and i'm here to tell homeowners that are 62 and older about a great way to live a better retirement. it's called a reverse mortgage. [ male announcer ] call right now to receive your free dvd and booklet with no obligation. it answers questions like how a reverse mortgage works, how much you qualify for, the ways to receive your money, and more. plus, when you call now, you'll get this magnifier with l.e.d. light absolutely free. when you call the experts

at one reverse mortgage today, you'll learn the benefits of a government-insured reverse mortgage. it will eliminate your monthly mortgage payments and give you tax-free cash from the equity in your home. and here's the best part -- you still own your home. take control of your retirement today. ♪ ♪ for the first time, juror b29 is speaking out and telling everyone why she clanged her vote from guilty to not guilty. and making an emotional appeal to trayvon martin's parents. we'll have all of that. stay with us. ♪ [ woman ] destination assist. this is ann.

where would you like to go tonight? ♪ [ male announcer ] it's a golden opportunity to see how lexus effortlessly connects you to where you're going. ♪ come to the golden opportunity sales event and experience the connectivity of lexus enform, available on all lexus models, including the es and rx. ♪ this is the pursuit of perfection. ♪ trust your instincts to make the call. to treat my low testosterone, my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal

in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about the only underarm low t treatment, axiron.

what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. today exactly one month after the supreme court's

disastrous decision gutting the voting rights act, the obama administration is punching back. in a huge announcement, attorney general eric holder said the justice department will fight to guarantee voting rights in states with a history of discrimination, starting with texas. >> today i am announcing that the justice department will ask a federal court in texas to subject the state of texas to a preclearance regime similar to the one required by section 5 of the voting rights act. >> and the attorney general promised this was just the beginning. >> this is the department's first action to protect voting rights following the shelby county decision. but it will not be our last. my colleagues and i are determined to use every tool at our disposal to stand against discrimination wherever it is foundment.

>> this is a powerful response to the supreme court. it says the federal government will be there to stop states from discriminating at the ballot box. over the last month, republicans have gone on a rampage to restrict voting rights. it started with texas, was pushed ahead with its voter id law just hours after the court's ruling. texas was the first. but it quickly spread. within 48 hours of the ruling, five more states moved forward with voter id laws. and in just the last day, we've seen two more states make moves to restrict voting. today the attorney general of the united states put those states on notice that these laws must not stand. joining me now is harvard law professor charles ogletree. thanks for coming on the show. >> my pleasure, reverend. >> so professor, the supreme court struck down a key part of

the voting rights act. but now the attorney general is going to use a different part of the law to protect those rights. take me through that. how does that work? >> this is very important. i have to say this for eric holder, he has been a dynamic attorney general like janet reno for clinton, going all the way back to the attorney general for president, lyndon baines johnson. he has done this by saying we've written this into law. congress has passed it as recently as 2006. it makes a big difference in getting people to vote you. tried to stop people from voting with voter suppression in the 2012 elections. you try to stop people from voting after the march across the edmund pettis bridge in 1963. none of that worked. he is going to use every single tool available to him to make that happen. he has made this very effective today by saying i'm going go to another provision. it's going to be very clear. and texas and other states will not be able to avoid the laws. a very important step by the attorney general. >> the president said right

after the supreme court had made its decision they had made a mistake. listen to president obama's reaction. >> i might not be here as president had it not been for those who courageously helped to pass the voting rights act. i think that the supreme court made a mistake in its ruling. >> what does he mean when he says he may not be this president if the voting rights act had not been passed. and now the supreme court has taken out a major part of it. >> well, you know what it means for this point of view. you and i were traveling around the country in the last year because from state after state, those folks having voter suppression by requiring voter ids. we won every court ballot that we had. we got people to go to the polls. as i said, 150 churches got together in florida and went out and made that happen very clearly. so the law is there. the president is following the

law. the attorney general is following the law. people just don't want to hear it. but these people are being very cautious, very careful, and barack obama is not making new law. eric holder is not making new law. they're applying the law that congress has and already passed. so i think this is a good day for everybody, because it makes us have a level playing field when it comes to the issue of voting. everybody has a vote. every vote will be counted. >> now, as you said, many of us travelled a lot last year around this question of people having to right voter id laws. but let me show you a map of what the attorney general faces now. these are the states that have now come with new voting laws. he has said now he is going to pick them off state by state, as many of us are raising our voices about the need to protect the right to vote, professor ogle treatment. >> two things, reverend sharpton. number one, if you see these stages, a lot of them are in the south. and populations of african-americans and hispanics are in those states.

so those are people who vote more than anybody else very reliably. and they vote democratic, which i think is one of the reasons that people, republican governors are changing those laws in those states. it won't work. we're going to make sure that everybody has the right to vote. one vote, one time. and not having discrimination. our kids are wondering what is this happening? we heard about this back in the 20th century. but why in the 21st century? it makes no sense. it's not going to happen. and we're going to stop it right here, right now in every way that we can. >> well, thank you, professor charles ogletree. let me say this is about preserving the right to vote, preserving an american democracy. the attorney general is right, and the people must stand up and rally just like we did 50 years ago, 48 years ago in selma. we cannot allow any voter suppression to go unchallenged, unanswered, and without it being turned around.

coming up, we hear directly from juror b29 for the first time. what was her first vote? what she say to trayvon martin's mother? keep it right here. [ shapiro ] at legalzoom, you can take care of virtually all your important legal matters in just minutes. protect your family... and launch your dreams. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. using night-vision goggles to keep an eye on my spicy buffalo wheat thins. who's gonna take your wheat thins? i don't know. an intruder, the dog, bigfoot. could you get the light? [ loud crash ] what is going on?! honey, i was close! it's a yeti! [ male announcer ] must! have! wheat thins! prefer the taste of gevalia house blend over the taste of starbucks house blend? not that we like tooting our own horn but...

♪ toot toot. [ male announcer ] find gevalia in the coffee aisle or at gevalia.com the day building a play set begins with a surprise twinge of back pain... and a choice. take up to 4 advil in a day or 2 aleve for all day relief. [ male announcer ] that's handy. ♪ [ herbie ] eh, hold on brent, what's this? oh, that's the new nissan. there's no doubt, that's definitely gonna throw him off. she's seen it too. oh this could be trouble. [ sentra lock noise ] oh man. gotta think fast, herbie. back pedal, back pedal. [ crowd cheering ] oh, he's down in flames and now the ice-cold shoulder. one last play... no, game over! gps take him to the dog house. [ male announcer ] make a powerful first impression. the all-new nissan sentra. ♪

the big breaking news tonight. juror b29 speaks out and says zimmerman got away with murder. we'll hear her emotional interview, next. uh, i'm in a timeout because apparently riding the dog like it's a small horse is frowned upon in this establishment! luckily though, ya know, i conceal this bad boy underneath my blanket just so i can get on e-trade. check my investment portfolio, research stocks... wait, why are you taking... oh, i see...solitary. just a man and his thoughts. and a smartphone... with an e-trade app.

♪ nobody knows... [ male announcer ] e-trade. investing unleashed.

we're back with more breaking news from zimmerman juror b29, the woman we now know as maddie. for the first time ever, we are hearing and seeing her take on the trial. here's part of that explosive interview with abc news. >> what was your first vote? >> my first vote was second-degree murder. >> second-degree murder? >> in between that nine hours, it was hard. a lot of us wanted to find something bad, something that we could connect to the law. for myself, he's guilty. because the evidence shows he is guilty. >> he is guilty of? >> killing trayvon martin. but as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you

can't find -- you can't say he is guilty. >> did you want to step out at all? did you want to quit? >> i was the juror that was going to give them the hung jury. oh, i was. i fought to the end. it's hard for me to sleep. it's hard for me to eat, because i feel that i was forcibly included in trayvon martin's death. and i carry him on my back. i'm hurting as much as trayvon martin's mom is, because there is no way that any mother should feel that pain. >> guilty of killing trayvon martin. wow. back with me now is seema iyer and ken padowitz. i'm also joined by veteran prosecutor paul henderson. thank you all for joining me. >> thanks for having us. >> paul, what is your reaction to hearing juror b29, maddie,

talking about the pain of trayvon martin's family? >> you know, i think that's exactly what the prosecution wanted to impart to this jury. they wanted them in that jury room to feel for and identify with trayvon martin's parents. and so when i hear her saying that she wanted to identify with them, she feels that pain, she wanted to find him guilty, and she didn't know how to get to guilty given the legal standards that she was given in florida law, it really highlights to me i think some of the shortcomings in the presentation from the prosecution because that's your job as a prosecutor is to give them that road map, to give them those signs and give them the tools in that jury room so that they can get to the verdict that you want them to reach. and so it's very frustrating, i think, certainly for them, to hear that that's what she wanted to do and did not feel that she had the tools to fight back with the other jurors or even to hold on to those convictions for herself for the entire verdict. >> seema, she clearly says that

as the law was read to me, which the prosecutor is clearly in there somewhere. and the law is in there somewhere. and she said again, it had to be intentional, which is not true. >> but she says that. the statement that you just said, after she said in this interview the words guilty and the word evidence. so i certainly don't understand how my friend paul reconciles that, because even though i understand what you're saying. you're saying that the law is the problem here, the way the jury instructions were heard. but before you get to that, rev, this juror is telling us that she found him guilty, that there is evidence, and that she now feels guilty for finding a contrary verdict. >> no, but i think she is saying that the evidence was that he killed, and that she felt he was guilty, but as the law was read, she couldn't find that. that's how i understand what she is saying. >> but she is not saying the key words of justification.

she is not talking about self-defense. and i'm sure paul heard this too. when she says the word "intentional", the act itself was intentional. >> again, i think that's where you and -- had said earlier that the prosecutor didn't make that clear. >> i did say that. >> i think that's what is lacking here. that. >> is what was lacking here, because i think there was evidence, and it could be interpreted in two different ways. and obviously, at the end of the day, this jury chose to interpret the evidence that was presented to them. >> right. >> in a way that supported zimmerman's presentation. but there was another way to interpret that same evidence and to see conflicts in that evidence that they could have gotten to a verdict of guilty. she is saying that's what she wanted to do. that's what she believed she had. but she did not have a clear enough tool. and i think that's the gap. that's where we missed out. >> ken, what happens in the jury room? tell me. go in the jury room and tell me what could have been the pressuring inside the jury room?

>> well, inside that jury room, the strongest personalities are going to end up being the leaders of the jury. and so the other lesser personalities are not as strong. they need to have the ammunition, the tools, as was stated before, the tools to be able to tell the rest of the jury this person is guilty. here is the evidence. here is why this person is guilty. and that's why i said the prosecutor's closing argument, the second argument was brilliant emotionally, but what it lacked was it didn't show the jury how to apply the law step by step to each piece of fact in this case. and that was what was happening back in that jury room. this juror didn't have the tools to fight off the other jurors and make it clear that the law does support a conviction here based on the evidence that is in this trial. >> that's exactly it. >> maddy has talked about how she feels about her decision. now listen to this. >> i stand by this decision

because of the law. if i stand by the decision because of my heart, he would have been guilty. >> i know some people have said point-blank, george zimmerman got away with murder. how do you respond to those people who say that? >> george zimmerman -- that's -- george zimmerman got away with murder. but you can't get away from god. and at the end of the day, he's going to have a lot of questions and answers he has to deal with. the law couldn't prove it, but, you know, you know, the world goes in circles. >> seema -- >> shame on maddy. maddy, shame on you. how dare you invoke god and the lord to us god-fearing people when the law was there. the evidence was on your side. reverend, al, shame on her. >> maybe she didn't understand

the law? >> exactly. >> maybe the law was interpreted, i think the way -- i think where i disagree is that you act adds though she is a lawyer. >> and the law is really complicated. this is not something that is uncommon. when you talk to jurors, they frequently say you know what? i just didn't understand. it really is the obligation of us lawyers when we're in trial, the last thing that you want to leave those jurors with is a tool to interpret the jury instructions that they have in order to get to the verdict that you want them to achieve. and she is saying she wanted it. she just didn't know how to achieve it. that's a real shortcoming. >> that's exactly right, reverend. and it's not shame on the juror. this is our system of justice. it's not shame on the juror. she was a juror in this case, and we need to respect the verdict. but we can take a look to learn for the future. >> right. >> about what some of the problems were here, or what some of the failings were. and it's not a failure of this juror. it's a failure of the law. the law is confusing. the stand your ground law is

confusing and should be revoked. >> ken, if we respect the verdict, then we don't change the law and we remain as compliant as everyone else. and paul, i do concede with you, and paul and i have spent many hours together here at msnbc. and paul, i do want to concede that in both of the prosecution as well as the defense attorneys arguments. >> absolutely. >> they did not bring up manslaughter enough. so with that, and reverend al, that point. >> and they did not bring up that you can fight and hold out. i think what they could have done. >> that's right. >> is ask for more clarity on the law. i don't blame her for not understanding something that wasn't explained. and i differ with those who say you can respect the verdict and also change the law. you respect that they made a decision on the law the way it is. but i think the way the law -- the way the law is needs to be changed and clirified. that's where i think my view is. >> absolutely. >> that's why we have you, reverend al, because you are

organizing. >> and that's why we have you. you can fight it back. >> we have. to we have. to we have to use this as a teaching point and changing point. >> that's why we have the lawyers. >> seema, ken, and paul, thank you for your time this evening. >> thanks for having us. friend or foe, i want to know. "reply al" is next. she knows you like no one else. and you wouldn't have it any other way. but your erectile dysfunction - you know, that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure.

do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. bob will retire when he's 153, which would be fine if bob were a vampire. but he's not. ♪ he's an architect with two kids and a mortgage. luckily, he found someone who gave him a fresh perspective on his portfolio. and with some planning and effort, hopefully bob can retire at a more appropriate age. it's not rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade.

what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'. [ whirring ] [ dog barks ] i want to treat more dogs. ♪ our business needs more cases. [ male announcer ] where do you want to take your business? i need help selling art. [ male announcer ] from broadband to web hosting to mobile apps, small business solutions from at&t have the security you need to get you there. call us. we can show you how at&t solutions can help you do what you do... even better. ♪ 50 years ago dr. king said i have a dream. today we have made progress, but the struggle to expand rights and opportunities goes on.

for blacks, for women, for latinos, for the lgbt community. this summer we'll highlight stories of individual efforts to move this nation forward to advance the dream. it's time for "reply al." friend or foe, i want to know. joel writes when are we going to be able to take collective meaningful action to rein in the gun rights activists to make the country safe for your kids and mine? well, i absolutely agree with you. that is what we must do in terms of confronting the right wing, who won't even allow background checks. that's at the bottom of the fight. if we're talking about violence in chicago, if we're talking about stand your gun -- stand your ground laws in florida and

over 20 other states that encourage people to use deadly force, we have got to get the mentality of violence and the instruments of violence, guns, out of our society, and we must take it on aggressivively and do it collectively. you're right. thanks for watching. i'm al sharpton. "hardball" starts right now. new york decides. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start tonight with this, public office. what is it today? what does it say to elevate one to public office? what does it mean to hold someone high and say he or she should be our leader, that this is the best of us, the leader we choose to speak for us, act for us, be